Return-Path: <@SEGATE.SUNET.SE:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0s9vsW-0009acC; Fri, 12 May 95 17:39 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id 71F9E78C ; Fri, 12 May 1995 16:39:42 +0100 Date: Fri, 12 May 1995 10:42:07 EDT Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: Re: proposals X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1817 Lines: 40 pc: > I can't recommend reading Fennimore Cooper (see Mark Twain's lit crit), > but I just noticed that he does a lot of using time markers for space: a > place is two days away and the like. We could unpack this, of course, to > "the distance we could walk in two days" or some such, but that seems > unnecessary -- except that not doing so means we need tensor markers for > both time and space, not just a single one for both. Of course, that doesn't present a difficulty in my idiolect: {va lei re djedi} means "a spatial distance of two days". > Out side of physics, > I don't know of a case of using spatial terms for times. Well, as long as there is a reference velocity, times and distances become more or less equivalent. For example, describing a trip you might say "it rained from Pittsburgh to Washington, but after that it was sunny", is that a spatial or time distance? It can be thought as either. Or "When are we going to stop?" "After three more kilometers." "I can't wait that long!" That's a time. If a place can be two days away, a time can be three kilometers later. > But I also > thought of the now virtually impenetrable "Bogies at 10:30 high" which is > an overt time reference for a _vector_(!) "Enemy aircraft about 45 > degrees left of straight ahead and more than 30 degrees (I think it is -- > you have to look up anyhow) above level" That's a different matter! Using hours for compass directions is purely conventional, and has to do with the usual arrangement of numbers on a dial. (Some watches are made to run counterclockwise, btw, that would confuse our pilot :) > More evidence for a needed > spatial vector marker that takes sumti for the direction, not the origin > (but how do we say the origin in that case?). The origin can always be said with {ki}, can't it? Jorge